Besides legal measures, the only current means to defeat The Cold War Within: The Fight for America’s Future is for the Republican dominated congress to utilize its budgetary power and defund the Rogue NLRB. Such action is even more imperative now, according to Phil Wilson in his latest issue of Union Bailout Update, where he expresses that the two new Democratic appointees, Sharon Block and Richard Griffin, are even more radical than Craig Becker, which is unimaginable. Additionally, Mr. Wilson expressed that Board Chairman Mark Pearce is the true engine behind achieving Card Check, and that the recent appointments provide Pierce the radical majority he needs to achieve Obama’s and Big Labor’s coveted goal of an Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) style regulatory scheme, aka “EFCA Through the Backdoor,” in time to support Obama’s 2012 Presidential run.

The goal is to implement new regulations such as the “Persuader Rule,” “quickie elections,” and the Posting Rule,  as described in Phil Wilson’s 2012 Predictions that will allow Big Labor to utilize the Persuasion of Power to prosecute brutal Corporate Campaigns against employees and employers in time to raise money, register voters and put union foot soldiers on the ground for the 2012 Election. The frightening political machines behind them are recounted in my new book The Devil at Our Doorstep.

Don’t believe that this administration and its Big Labor allies are that conniving and unethical? Read the following e-mail received from the Daily Kos supporting the President’s decision and re-election:

Yesterday President Obama used recess appointments to name Richard Cordray the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and to fill the vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board.

Please, send President Obama an email thanking him for this bold move.

Without these appointments, The National Labor Relations Board would cease to function as a defender of workers’ rights. Without a director, the CFPB couldn’t fulfill its critical function as a watchdog working to stop the fraudulent practices of mortgage companies, payday lenders, debt collectors and other financial interests that are bleeding Americans dry.

Republicans are livid. Failing to grind consumer and worker protections to a halt at the request of their Wall Street masters, Republicans are now claiming these appointments are unconstitutional (they’re not). Within hours of announcement, they began setting up congressional hearings.

This is a big effing deal, and credit should go where credit is due. Please send a thank you email to President Obama for making these recess appointments.

Keep fighting,
Chris Bowers
Campaign Director, Daily Kos

P.S. Please chip in $5 to help support Daily Kos.

One must be naïve or in denial if this type of straightforward language isn’t bothersome!  This group insinuates the goal of the NLRB is only to protect workers from employers. In fact, the Act has recognized the risk posed by labor unions. Pursuant to the language of the Act, the NLRB has two primary functions:

• To conduct secret-ballot elections among employees to determine whether or not the employees wish to be represented by a union; and
• To prevent and remedy statutorily defined unfair labor practices by employers and unions.

The implications are frightening if this administration, through the use of the NLRB, achieves its goal of neutering business and resurrecting the Gasping Dinosaurs as it will surely be A Death Penalty for Employees and Employers!

It is time to become involved and contact your elected representatives and ask them to defund the NLRB before it is too late. Further, support Right to Work! Newt Gingrich is right America, We are at War! Armageddon is at Hand! Please Wake up!

Labor regulators are set to propose sweeping new rules Tuesday that would dramatically speed up the time frame for union elections, a move that could make it easier for struggling unions to organize new members, and cut the time businesses have to mount anti-union campaigns.

A copy of the planned rules, to be announced by the National Labor Relations Board, was obtained by The Associated Press. The proposal is expected to irritate Republicans and business groups who have complained about the board’s pro-labor actions.

Most labor elections currently take place within 45-60 days after a union gathers enough signatures to file a petition, a time many companies use to discourage workers from unionizing. The new plan could cut that time by days or even weeks—depending on the case—by simplifying procedures, deferring litigation and setting shorter deadlines for hearings and filings.

But it does not impose a specific deadline for elections, as many labor leaders had hoped for. Canada, for example, requires such elections to take place in as little as 5 to 10 days.

The plan would “better insure that employees’ votes may be recorded accurately, efficiently and speedily,” said the board’s majority, led 3-1 by Democrats.

Passage would be a victory for labor unions that have long complained about employers using procedural delays and litigation to hold up elections and intimidate workers. Some employers hire so-called “union busting” consulting firms to produce videotapes, draft talking points or create brochures to deter unionizing.

Lynn Rhinehart, general counsel of the AFL-CIO, has called current union election procedures “a very cumbersome process that gets bogged down in litigation.”

“If the board is going to try to address some of the reasons for delay in the election process, that would be a positive thing,” she said in an interview before the proposed rule was announced. “Delay in the process has been a perennial problem.”

The board’s lone Republican, Brian Hayes, issued a vigorous dissent, saying the proposal would result in the type of “quickie elections” union leaders have long sought. Hayes claimed elections could be held in as little as 10 to 21 days from the filing of a petition, giving employers less of a chance to make their case.

“Make no mistake, the principal purpose for this radical manipulation of our election process is to minimize or, rather, to effectively eviscerate an employer’s legitimate opportunity to express its views about collective bargaining,” Hayes wrote.

Read the whole thing here.

Leave it to an Obama appointee to the National Labor Rights Board (NLRB) to want to push votes to install unions in the workplace on an accelerated schedule. I guess all the payoffs and special favors that Obama and his cohorts have given to labor unions in these two of the longest years any president ever had have not been enough.

On Oct. 21, NLRB Member Mark Gaston Pearce said that the time period between filing and the holding of elections for new union representation in a company should be “as brief as possible.”

Of course, this shortened election period is nothing but a sop to Big Labor and intended to hurt businesses that might try to put up a fight against the encroachment of unions.

As Jay Summer of the Labor Relations Counsel website says:

Regardless of Pearce’s stated rationale for interest in a shortened election period, if implemented, the shorter the election period, the less opportunity an employer has to exercise free speech rights and educate employees. The result would be a workforce making a decision whether or not to unionize relying only on what facts the union organizing them chooses to disclose, even if misleading or incomplete. Combined with electronic voting which would almost certainly depress voter participation, the almost certain result is a dramatic increase in unionization. This, of course, was the primary goal of EFCA’s card check proposal.

Naturally it’s all just a piece with Obama’s campaign to give unions paybacks, payoffs, and special favors to pay them back for the millions that they gave to him to run for president. It is also another example of Obama’s essential anti-business ideology.

Pearce was a recess appointment made by President Obama in March of 2010. His appointment expires in 2013.

Meanwhile, in yet another example of Obama’s war against business (and subsequent helping hand to jobs-killing unions), Obama’s Dept. of Labor announced that the Bush “culture of noncompliance” is over and Obama plans to crack down on those evil businesses that have gotten away with things for so long.

Obama Labor Solicitor Patricia Smith told attendees of a conference at Suffolk University Law School that the Labor Department would launch a new era of tougher enforcement of labor laws.

Smith heaped scorn on the pro-business Bush practices.

They relied on trickle-down enforcement; it doesn’t work any better than trickle-down economics. [As a result of reduced enforcement] many employers developed a “catch-me-if-you-can” attitude. Our challenge is to change that attitude.

You can just hear the left-wing ideology underpinning her rhetoric, can’t you?

Smith said that the Obama Labor Dept. intended to increase criminal prosecutions of businesses for perceived violations of labor law.

As we can see Obama’s anti-business crusade continues a pace with his other left-wing policies. He intends to use his power to shape regulation to go around Congress and our elected officials and push his extremist agenda anyway.

SEIU has been engaged in a fire-fight with the National Union of Health Workers. For SEIU, it isn’t enough that workers are unionized, but they must be unionized AND their dues flow into the purple political machine. The video features SEIU official David Regan, who ran the union’s voting campaign. Keep in mind, again, the “opponents” he mentions aren’t Republicans or businesses, but another labor union.

We hold out no hope that federal labor officials will seriously investigate SEIU’s fraud. Its President, Andy Stern, is, after all, America’s most frequent White House guest.

Still, that doesn’t mean the public shouldn’t be informed of SEIU’s actions. We have a treasure trove of information on SEIU’s fight with its fellow union. It is a story that will unfold here over the coming weeks.

Today’s Wall Street Journal and Fresno Bee report that SEIU engaged in illegal threats, ballot-tampering, and other serious violations of election rules during a June union election for 10,000 homecare providers in Fresno, according to voters and union staff who worked for SEIU during the election and have now come forward.

A sworn declaration from an SEIU whistleblower says that senior SEIU officials instructed organizers to violate election rules during the mail-in, secret-ballot vote, and then destroyed evidence of the violations. Statements from two former SEIU staff and several homecare providers were recently submitted to the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) as evidence accompanying a request to overturn the election results.

Among the illegal tactics reported:

• SEIU staff tampered with workers’ ballots, by voiding the ballots of workers who marked their ballot for NUHW, and by collecting ballots directly from workers’ mailboxes.
• Senior SEIU officials instructed staff to handle ballots in violation of election rule, and advised staff on how to do so in a way that was legally deniable.
• SEIU organizers threatened Latino caregivers that SEIU would “call immigration” and have them deported in retaliation unless they voted for SEIU.
• SEIU officials instructed staff to threaten and lie to voters that they would lose their  wages, their health insurance, and even their jobs unless they voted for SEIU.

Whole release on the NUHW report here. The entire election fraud complaint filed with the California Public Employment Relations Board against SEIU is below.

Fresno-complaint-summary –